[van-announce] [Fwd: COME TO GRAHAM EXTRADITION DECISION FEB. 21]

[No One is Illegal-Vancouver]

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: COME TO GRAHAM EXTRADITION DECISION FEB. 21
From:    "Cristina Soto" <csoto at sfu.ca>
Date:    Tue, February 15, 2005 9:43 am
To:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

PLEASE PASS THIS TO ALL YOUR CONTACTS

DECISION DAY IS HERE
DON'T LET AN INNOCENT MAN BE EXTRADITED TO THE U.S.

You've written Justice Minister Irwin Cotler.
You've signed the petition.
You've kept yourself informed.
Now its time to show up in person.

(What? You haven't done the above? then go to www.grahamdefense.org for
more information on the history of this case, the circumstances
surrounding the killing of Anna Mae Aquash in 1976 in Pine Ridge South
Dakota)

Monday Feb. 21 9:00 a.m.
Supreme Court
800 Smithe (at Howe St.)
South side of the street - go in and ask at info desk for room number

Gather and rally on site after the decision
BRING A SIGN SAYING 'NO EXTRADITION'
(in case the decision is to extradite)
even if its just a sheet of paper with big marker writing on it that you
pull out and hold up

Excerpts from last update here:

Justice Bennett recessed the hearing, announcing that her final decision
will be read at 9:00 a.m. on Monday, February 21. If she does commit John
Graham for extradition, he will appeal.

In closing, John's attorney Terry LaLiberte discussed two points: one,
that the certified evidence has been shown to be unreliable (see
www.grahamdefense.org for details), and two, that the U.S. has not
established the identification of John Graham as the perpetrator of the
murder of Anna Mae Aquash.

Mr. LaLiberte pointed out again that U.S. Attorney Mandel certified
evidence that does not exist. He argued that the body of evidence is
inadequate, since one alleged witness, Al Gates, was dead for nine months
when he was certified as being "available to testify;" another witness,
Frank Dillon, has said he did not make the statements attributed to him;
and the only alleged eyewitness, Arlo Looking Cloud, has stated he will
not testify against Graham, as the U.S. claims.

"We have provided cogent evidence that he will not testify against
Graham," said LaLiberte. "His lawyer says he will not testify. And the
proof is in the pudding. In a recent Grand Jury investigation, Mr. Looking
Cloud did not testify against Mr. Graham, and even refused immunity."

Mr. LaLiberte also stated that evidence submitted is not attributed to
anyone. "Some of this appears to be speculation by Mr. Mandel," said Mr.
LaLiberte, referring to the U.S. Attorney who certified the evidence.

"We want to believe our neighbour," said LaLiberte, referring to the U.S.,
"but there is some threshold at which so many holes have been punched in
the certified evidence, that we can no longer presume it is reliable."

Gregory DelBigio addressed the impact of the erosion of evidence, the dead
witness, recanted testimony, and the failure to identify John Graham. He
pointed out that whenever John's attorneys demonstrated that evidence was
not available as originally claimed by the U.S., they respond that they
"did not rely on that piece of evidence." Regarding witness Al Gates, who
is dead, Mr. DelBigio said, "They now say they don't rely on the Gates
testimony." But he said the court must consider the entire body of
evidence together. "The certification refers to the entire package of
evidence," said Mr. DelBigio. "The Court can no longer be sure the
evidence is sufficient for committal."

Mr. DelBigio said the Court has a duty to impose some minimum requirements
on the quality of evidence from the U.S. "This is not a rubber stamp or
meaningless ritual," he told Justice Bennett. "There is some bare minimum
of protection for a Canadian citizen."

Mr. LaLiberte agreed. "There is no due process here," he said. "We've
shown big holes in the evidence. They say 'trust me, I'm an Attorney
General.' The certified evidence is totally inadequate. They are hiding
behind the law, making bold assertions that are not true. The process is
flawed. Who are these people - the Ecoffeys and Alonzos and Graff - these
people who are claiming witnesses are able to testify to these things?"

"Whenever we show their evidence is wrong," said Mr. LaLiberte, "they say
it doesn't matter. Well, it does matter."

Crown Attorney Deborah Strachan, representing the U.S. said, "The
extradition judge is not to be concerned about reliability of evidence."
She insisted the Extradition Act requires the court to presume the
evidence supplied is accurate and presented in good faith. "Fairness of
the process is irrelevant," she told the court.

John's case is very similar to the 2003 case of U.K. vs. Tarantino, in
which the Court stayed the proceedings due to the unreliability of the
evidence supplied by the U.K. As in John's case, a witnesses was shown to
have died, another witness had absconded, and a third witness was shown to
be unreliable. The Judge in that case ruled that although our Extradition
Act requires courts to trust the foreign state, there is some minimum
threshold of reliability that the Canadian courts must uphold.

"The court has the power to control its own process," the judge ruled. "It
is for the court to guard its own integrity." This certainly would sound
like the Court of a sovereign nation.

If the order to extradite is issued, John's final appeal will be to the
Minister of Justice, Irwin Cotler, which will commence promptly.


Cristina Soto

Doctoral Candidate
School of Resource and Environmental Management
Simon Fraser University
8888 University Drive
Burnaby, British Columbia
Canada V5A 1S6


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.665 / Virus Database: 428 - Release Date: 4/21/04



-- 
To subscribe to our low-traffic email annoucement list, please email
noii-van at resist.ca

No One is Illegal- Vancouver
web: noii-van.resist.ca
email: noii-van at resist.ca
(604)682-3269 x 7149

The No One is Illegal campaign is in full confrontation with Canadian
colonial border policies, denouncing and taking action to combat racial
profiling of immigrants and refugees, detention and deportation policies,
and wage-slave conditions of migrant workers and non-status people.

We struggle for the right for our communities to maintain their
livelihoods and resist war, occupation and displacement, while building
alliances and supporting indigenous sisters and brothers also fighting
theft of land and displacement.